Yes, the DEM victory in Pennsylvania’s special election WAS a referendum on Trump, and that’s a GOOD thing

(National Sentinel) MAGA: It’s looking as though the Democratic candidate in Pennsylvania’s 18th District, Connor Lamb, will defeat Republican challenger Rick Saccone in a special election held Tuesday.

On the surface, this looks like a major repudiation of President Donald J. Trump, and the Democrats who are talking about the election results are attempting to frame it that way.

After all, Trump won this reliably red district by 20 points in 2016. One dejected Republican strategist, Mike Murphy, claimed that the party should have “been able to elect a box of hammers in this district. If we’re losing here, you can bet there is a Democratic wave coming.” Yes, well, more on this in a moment.

Let it be known that Lamb’s extremely narrow victory, while a win for Democrats, is actually a validation of Trump, not a repudiation, as Murphy is attempting to claim. Here’s why.

First of all, Lamb is a former Marine and is expected to support Trump’s military revitalization efforts. For another, Lamb supports Trump’s tariffs on steel and aluminum, which helped him win more of the organized labor vote (some of which went to Trump in 2016 for his touting of better trade deals and tariffs for industrial cheaters).

Lamb’s pro-life. Lamb has said publicly he does not support uber-liberal Nancy Pelosi to be reelected as party leader in the House.

The former prosecutor is no Left-wing gun control hack. “I believe we have a pretty good law on the books and it says on paper that there are a lot of people who should never get guns in their hands,” he said recently.

He has called for bipartisan legislation to stabilize health insurance markets that have been virtually destroyed by six years of Obamacare, just as Trump has done. He backs the president’s plan to more aggressively address the opioid overdose epidemic.

He favors tax cuts to the middle class, as Trump and the GOP have delivered (though he did criticize the part of the plan that dramatically, and permanently, cut the corporate tax rate).

Plus, all of those brilliant pollsters who predicted yet another Democratic landslide — a Lamb win by 5-6 points in three major surveys — were wrong. Again.

The fact that Trump campaigned for Saccone twice while sending in surrogates including son-in-law Jared Kushner is very likely what narrowed the gap to its current razor-thin margin.

And there is this: The Democratic reprieve, such as it is, may not even last: The seat comes up for grabs again in November.

As for Murphy, he’s a veteran #neverTrump guy who, like the Republican establishment, all but sabotaged Saccone’s candidacy because he did toe the Trump line. So there’s that.

Bottom line: This wasn’t the wash-out, in-Trump’s-face, Democrat victory they had hoped for, which is why most of them and their sycophantic mainstream media allies are not crowing about it today.

Let’s see what happens in November.

Free speech is under attack by the social media giants Facebook, YouTube and Google — stay fully informed at Censored.news.

1 Comment on Yes, the DEM victory in Pennsylvania’s special election WAS a referendum on Trump, and that’s a GOOD thing

All this is true, so yes, it is a good thing. Lamb has no voting record, so it is unclear how “principled” he’ll be when he has to stand up to Pelosi. He may turn out to be another Manchin, a fake Blue Dog Democrat, who only touted his credentials to get elected. That said, I do hope I am wrong on my assessment and that you are right for that would be a good thing – ousting RINOs and replacing them with either agnostic or pro-Trump Democrats is just as good as replacing them with Republicans. If this is true, then Pelosi won’t be speaker. My gut tells me that the Republicans will retain control of the Senate. It is tougher to oust incumbents and the Democrats will have to engage in more widespread fraud to oust incumbent Republicans.